Impeachment not going so well?

[jp55665566]

The Constitution was "rigged" by Trump's political philosophy ancestors. Heck, he's already rigged the next 2020 election with his buddy Putin, just like 2016. He and Vlad just had phone sex together ! Jeez... what will it take?

 

[gunthernehmen]

Obvious that Pelosi's tardy turnover is worrying those afflicted with TDS

 

[phrodeau]

The Constitution was "rigged" by Trump's political philosophy ancestors. Heck, he's already rigged the next 2020 election with his buddy Putin, just like 2016. He and Vlad just had phone sex together ! Jeez... what will it take?

It takes a good guy with a gavel to stop a bad guy with a Sharpie.

 

[Dumpington]

phrodeau writes: "Can’t find any testimonials?"

And WHERE exactly in our U.S. Constitution does it say anything about "testimonials," phrodeau?

jp55665566 writes: "The Constitution was "rigged" by Trump's political philosophy ancestors."

America's Founding Fathers were (according to today's Democrats) a bunch of slave-owning racists who didn't understand the importance of transgendered rights!

gunthernehmen writes: "Obvious that Pelosi's tardy turnover is worrying those afflicted with TDS"

Speaker Pelosi got drunk shortly after the impeachment articles were passed and LOST them, but there's NO WAY she's ever going to admit doing that, which is why she's simply never going to submit them to the U.S. Senate.

phrodeau writes: "It takes a good guy with a gavel to stop a bad guy with a Sharpie."

The fact that Adam Schiff & Jerry Nadler both use Sharpies doesn't really enter into this discussion, phrodeau! It's a common writing instrument.

 

[Cubantripod]

Can’t find any testimonials?

I don't think you're understanding how this presumption of innocence thing works or are you just trying to twist it because you have to find a way to get him? You need to prove he did something wrong. He doesn't need to prove he didn't do it.

 

[JackLuis]

I don't think you're understanding how this presumption of innocence thing works or are you just trying to twist it because you have to find a way to get him? You need to prove he did something wrong. He doesn't need to prove he didn't do it.

Well the witnesses in the hearings sort of testified he did, so there!

Gym Jordon and Geatz defence was a bit weak. No one in the Administration defended Trumpikins, in fact Mick confessed to the extortion on Nation wide TV!

 

[magicalmoments]

#451 above
So... By using your argument all a defendant need do is refuse to put up a defence against the prosecutions case and the presumption of innocence lets them off, they go free.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

If the prosecution doesn’t bring the case to trial, the defense doesn’t have to do anything.

 

[jaF0]

#451 above
So... By using your argument all a defendant need do is refuse to put up a defence against the prosecutions case and the presumption of innocence lets them off, they go free.

That's sorta true. Burden of Proof is on the accuser in a criminal trial. Defense is not obligated to present any testimony or witnesses at all. There has been more than one case that employed that strategy.

But if they don't, the Judge or Jury is left with only the prosecution's case to consider and that doesn't always go well.

 

[icanhelp1]

#451 above
So... By using your argument all a defendant need do is refuse to put up a defence against the prosecutions case and the presumption of innocence lets them off, they go free.

In a court environment, the less you say the better. There's no point in possibly incriminating yourself. It's strictly up to the prosecution to make the case and the defense to refute evidence.

 

[Cubantripod]

#451 above
So... By using your argument all a defendant need do is refuse to put up a defence against the prosecutions case and the presumption of innocence lets them off, they go free.

No lawyer will let his client testify in his own defense in a criminal trial, unless it's pretty obvious he's going to lose.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You are right. He doesn’t have to prove his innocence. So where’s the sworn testimony to support his innocence?

Can’t find any testimonials?

Nope....just as imaginary as the proof he's guilty of anything.

Obvious that Pelosi's tardy turnover is worrying those afflicted with TDS

Phro, among a few others, is coming un-fucking-glued.

 

[phrodeau]

In a court environment, the less you say the better. There's no point in possibly incriminating yourself. It's strictly up to the prosecution to make the case and the defense to refute evidence.

And nobody ever calls a character witness, or produces an alibi, right?

 

[Cubantripod]

And nobody ever calls a character witness, or produces an alibi, right?

Unless the issue before the Court is something like defamation where character is relevant to the allegation, the rules of evidence prevent the prosecution or plaintiff from raising the issue of the defendant's character until the defendant brings it up.

 

[phrodeau]

In a court environment, the less you say the better. There's no point in possibly incriminating yourself. It's strictly up to the prosecution to make the case and the defense to refute evidence.

So where’s the sworn testimony to refute the evidence against Trump?

 

[gunthernehmen]

So where’s the sworn testimony to refute the evidence against Trump?

You first. Where the evidence AGAINST him? (She said he said doesn't count in real court, just kangaroo court)

 

[icanhelp1]

You first. Where the evidence AGAINST him? (She said he said doesn't count in real court, just kangaroo court)

I don't answer that trolling retard. The senate trial hasn't even started yet. He doesn't know shit about legal proceedings he just throws shit against the wall looking for attention. Him and KeithD AKA skypilot have zero objectivity and are not worth a conversation. 66,000 post and none add to a conversation, pure argumentative banter with no substance.

 

[phrodeau]

You first. Where the evidence AGAINST him? (She said he said doesn't count in real court, just kangaroo court)

Read the transcript.

“There’s just one thing that you need to know,
Trump said ‘Do us a favor, though.’”

 

[gunthernehmen]

Read the transcript.

“There’s just one thing that you need to know,
Trump said ‘Do us a favor, though.’”

I did. The call amounted to "You got a problem you should look into."

Trump is not (Thank GOD) a polished politician. He probably uses the wrong fork for his salad. He says shit "in the moment" and doesn't give a shit if some pretentious blowhard on a random sex forum (that's you, Phro, in case you were wondering) worries about where he placed the comma.

He's just a guy that got hired to clean up the mess both parties (mostly yours, but both are at fault) created.

He should star in an episode of "Dirty Jobs with Mike Rowe".

 

[Carnal_Flower]

1. The phone call

2. The documented fact of the aid being withheld (in violation of the Impound Act) in return for a public declaration of investigations. Do you want to claim this had nothing to do with Trump and Mick Mulvaney took it upon himself to withhold the aid for his own reasons? Fine, then provide evidence of that. Doesn't make sense when POTUS directs foreign policy, as you people love to claim. But hey, give us proof that the soldiers in the field and the underlings all acted outside the CiC's orders.

3. THe directives and orders passed down from Trump to the people on the ground in Ukraine.

Do you want to claim Sondland, Taylor and all the rest of them cooked up this plot themselves vs. Trump ordering the whole process? Fine; then provide some evidence of that. Otherwise, their testimony goes uncontested.

It's not like a drunken night at a frat house. ("He said/she said"). It's a chain of command within the US Government. The soldiers in the field have testified to their orders and directives; in absence of any contradictory evidence, we have no reason to believe the US Gov didn't work exactly as it's supposed to work. POTUS determines policy and passes it along down the chain of command.

You first. Where the evidence AGAINST him? (She said he said doesn't count in real court, just kangaroo court)

 

[gunthernehmen]

I don't answer that trolling retard. The senate trial hasn't even started yet. He doesn't know shit about legal proceedings he just throws shit against the wall looking for attention. Him and KeithD AKA skypilot have zero objectivity and are not worth a conversation. 66,000 post and none add to a conversation, pure argumentative banter with no substance.

You make some solid points, but it's a little like picking a scab that's started to itch. You know you shouldn't but you just gotta.

 

[gunthernehmen]

TDS;DR

See #474 above

 

[jp55665566]

I did. The call amounted to "You got a problem you should look into."

Trump is not (Thank GOD) a polished politician. He probably uses the wrong fork for his salad. He says shit "in the moment" and doesn't give a shit if some pretentious blowhard on a random sex forum (that's you, Phro, in case you were wondering) worries about where he placed the comma.

He's just a guy that got hired to clean up the mess both parties created.

Yes, most citizens appreciate and understand President Trump's communicative style. There are a few nut-bars in California and New York who don't like it. TRUMP 2020 Keep America Great !
The 2020 vote tally will likely be 100,000,000 votes for PRESIDENT Trump.

 

[phrodeau]

I did. The call amounted to "You got a problem you should look into."

Trump is not (Thank GOD) a polished politician. He probably uses the wrong fork for his salad. He says shit "in the moment" and doesn't give a shit if some pretentious blowhard on a random sex forum (that's you, Phro, in case you were wondering) worries about where he placed the comma.

He's just a guy that got hired to clean up the mess both parties (mostly yours, but both are at fault) created.

He should star in an episode of "Dirty Jobs with Mike Rowe".

Are you defending him? I hear that’s not a good idea.

 

[gunthernehmen]

Are you defending him? I hear that’s not a good idea.

Mike Rowe? He rocks.

Or are you threatening me with being banned for not being on the TDS Train?